Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Let's use the msot recent hall rumours as an example.
Arizona offered a different quantity of assets than what the Flames offered New Jersey.
let's assume the two offers are on their face identical in terms of value.
New Jersey picked the offer that worked better for them.
Why didn't the flames then just increase the value of their offer? Even if they were willing to, would the combination of assets work for New Jersey or would they have taken a lesser total asset package of assets they wanted vs. a more valuable asset package of things they didn't necessarily want.
|
But that argument makes the assumption that both Calgary and Arizona made only one offer and NJ just had to pick between them.
Why assume they didn't increase their offer as time went on, or as they were made aware of the other team's interest?
Given the nature of negotiations in general, there's a good chance that Arizona increased their offer because of Calgary's interest in Hall, and conversely that the Flames increased their offer to NJ as well to try and keep up.
It's the relationship of value to supply and demand.